A Liberal rout will require a measure of courage that has been wanting in the electorate for some time.

Somehow, Mr Howard has convinced many people that there is a connection between himself and sound economic governance. He convinced a few voters that there was a connection between 9-11 and Iraq. He convinced a few voters that there was a connection between terr'rism and refugees. He convinced a few voters that we should join the war-for-profit gang:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18261.htm

Now that the facts are in, you would think that the moral outrage would wipe the incumbents like a dirty arse. Ah, but Mr Howard seems to have convinced many voters that there is a connection between mendacity and good economic governance. Only the best liars make the best CEOs of Australia Inc.

Makes sense!

Do you think there is any Anzac spirit left? Do you wonder if it was ever there in the first place?

Last evening I was driving home, listening to ABC's PM programme, with the lead story Mr Rudd daring JH to call the election immediately. Anyhow, in conjunction with this, the female reporter from Darwin (where JH was yesterday) had this to say. "If the reception Mr Howard received during his visit to a Darwin Shopping Centre is anything to go by, he won't be calling the election anytime soon" or words to that effect. At that point we heard JH being stridently abused by some bloke, and a little later by another, and some time later by a small chorus of "protestors".

This surprised me as only the night before we'd seen JH being mobbed by welcoming crowds of aboriginal people at Hermannsburg Community outside Alice. An Aside; Hermannsburg is TWO Communities; one is for bludgers, the other for workers. They were in Ntaria, the workers one. Still, it seemed "possible" that a number of white activists may have ambushed him in Darwin, so I really didn't think too much about the PM story.

An hour later, watching SBS TV news there was also a report on the PM in Darwin. At the same shopping centre, but very different. As at H'Burg, he was being mobbed, his hand shaken, Aborigines and non-aborigines rushing to have their photos taken; even a guy looking like your standard skateboarder (!) went up and bear-hugged Howard. (I kid you not). It was a bit like rock-star stuff. The lone loudmouth from the ABC report was there of course, and another as JH left, but the totally false impression the ABC had tried to present was clearly destroyed.

This has made it oh so clear. The shrill Howard-haters are far outnumbered by those who respect the bloke. Whether this respect will translate to votes is not certain, but I'd say it's very likely.

Any betting person should be taking the very generous odds on a Coalition Victory...NOW! Cheers.

I mostly concur with the author.

While Rudd is ahead by 9.5 points at the moment all that is required is a 4.25 point turn around. This phoney campaign so far has only targetted the fringes.

I do not agree Rudd is cautious in the area of Policy. Why?
Remember the faux pas on withdrawal from Iraq?
Remember his confusion on the meaning of productivity?

While these things in themselves are probably meaningless in terms of changing peoples votes they do indicate a fairly loose understanding of his Party Policy Position and indeed of economics generally. They indicate sloppiness not caution.

Foreign Affairs is a policy void for Rudd. He has only ever stated a position on Iraq. Nothing on Afghanistan, the Middle East, the US, our near Asian neighbours, Japan, China and Korea nor Europe. He hasn't indicated any position on the UN or whether he will follow a bilateral or multilateral approach.

His Health Policy has all the appearance of being made on the run and in essence is demonstratebly ineffective. He is merely throwing an extra $2 Billion at the states 75 hospitals over 3 years. While Howard has targeted one hospital Rudd's policy is seen as a mere political counter, hoping to capitalise on Howard's seeming preferential treatment of one marginal electorate.


As for the grubby little episode in NY. That will bite over a longer period. How? Who forgets Malcolm's trousers or Alexanders's fishnets or Bob's womanising. While the media have largely glossed over the events in the lap dancing club...I reckon just a mention of Rudd and New York in the same sentence, people will automatically make the connection and smirk in a fashion reminiscent of many faces of Benny Hill. It will be Rudd's lasting legacy regardless of whether he's PM on not. Unkind ... I know ... but such is the lot of hypocrisy.

Though as a retired cockie who was mostly his own boss, as a bush sportsman also learnt a bit about fair play.

There is also a bush term about a boss holding the big end of the stick. That is why it is so surprising to an old bush thinker that workers have let the growing corporate culture have both strong hands on the fair-go stick.

Also these days we never hear a word about arbitration, at one time a major part of the fairplay system.

Have faith in us, is now the swansong of the Howard government. But as one who has listened to grizzles from workers and shearers in country bars - it makes one wonder about the long term future?

The television shots of John Howard in shopping malls are telling, the believers are given very short views while the screaming ferals are starred.However much he is tested, John Howard keeps his dignity.
It is the difference between the sides,on Liberal sides the quietness is there but the quiet ones will vote for Howard's party.On Labor's sides the screamers are loud but secretly ,will they put Rudd in?
The more the polls favour Kevin Rudd, the more he struts and flirts and flutters his eyelashes at the everpresent camera.
Are the public taken in by this Labor cabaret? If so ,they deserve what they get.

Let our biases run free! mine are well known but I believe what I post.
Rudd looks to be unbeatable, Howard has tried most of his tricks and failed but what if?
God forbid but what if APEC is targeted?
Gee please no but what if it is?
Some, unwise in my view unions are already throwing mud at Rudd.
I am not totally convinced in a watered down IR policy's but not workchoices next stage surely?
Who will lead us in the next 12 months as America leaves Iraq?
They will, task not achieved ,how will we handle it.
It will be Kevin Rudd, sure it could implode but who truly thinks it will ?
Howard is gone truly even if he won he is gone age and this hard fight has ended conservatives lack of future planning he can not beat time and it is his time to go.

If the recent polls are correct, labor is now seen as the better economic managers.

100 seats here we come. No Prime Minister has ever gone to an election without being the preferred PM in the polls, even Keating in 1996 was in front.

Bye Bye Mr Howard I hope you enjoy your retirement.

Labor is a lot of PR and very little policy. They are hoping to win on advertising rather than substance. We are seeing a lot of Rudd and very little of the team. It is all aimed at making sure that apart from a few appearances by the trusted few (like Swan) or the ones he needs (like Gillard) the rest of the team remains quiet. There are two reasons for this, the first is that he does not want the inexperienced ones making bloopers and reminding people that the team lacks experience, the second is that he does not to remind people of how many members of what is likely to be his front bench are former unionists...and the influence the unions are likely to have.
It is not quite a one man band. Rudd's own minders are too savvy for that. They orchestrated the 'leaking' of the night-club visit knowing full well that the positive effect was going to be greater than the negative. It portrayed Rudd as the 'honest, contrite, Aussie larrikin' designed to appeal to voters.
This is what is so disturbing, that the electorate is apparently being taken in by a mirage.

I'm all for recycling, but AaHE Is it possible for you to post something different?

Howard is a consummate politician no doubt, but that is the problem.

Unfortunately, he lacks genuine compassion.

This is the fundamental difference between a neoconservative government (a.k.a. Howard) and a convergent or centrist government (a.k.a. Rudd).

In other words, it's the vision of the leaders that will direct the future of Australia.

For me, Howard has passed his use-by date and is beginning to smell, really bad.

Communicat while your bitterness is apparent you should understand the ALP has much help in unseating Howard.
His new conservatives, those who have only ever voted for him, and so very many former Liberal voters are driving the polls.
Bitterness about this will not change the fact conservatives slept while Labor took wrong leaders and wrong policy's to elections.
The wounds are self inflicted and the victims of Howard's unconcern many.
Election night at Belly's! a party to behold!

Q&A continues the myth that the left are compassionate and bad while the right are mean and bad. This is a ridiculous notion. Mr Howard travels the world and it is a waste of tax payers money. Mr Rudd travels to the US and visits strip joints on tax payers money and he is only be human. Surely you can come up with better than that.

Belly are you aware of the fact that the ALP spends less on social welfare than the Coalition? (Take a look at the figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.)
I am not bitter - I am just alarmed at the unthinking support for Rudd and his cohorts when everything points to them making a total hash of government - then we are back to square one with the Coalition having to make the unpopular decisions to get the country back on track - only this time it may not be possible and Australia will be left behind even the so called 'developing' world.

Communicat I am sure if we met over a cup of coffee you and I would not be enemy's as we left one another.
However your posts for me at least highlight why John Howard is about to harm his party for years to come.
You again and again use fear as a weapon not policy's, and while it is true interest rates under Keiting hurt far too many ,you ignore that had been much higher under Howard Treasury days.
You find room to forgive Howard his faults but sheet home the blame for the very same sins to yesterdays ALP.
It would appear from your posts the well known reforms of Hawk/Keiting did not take place?
That you try to sell one sided and wrong views that Labor always ruins the economy?
And above all Communicat the resemblance to a host of front bencher's in this government in your posts is uncanny.
fear and lies miss information and a dogged refusal to see the voters no longer believe it ,no longer trust it, no longer fall for it are a picture of a government that understands it is finished.
OH welfare, so we spend less? giving weight to the fact it has been 11 years are we?
Just maybe the cash handout bribes are not being used for the kids welfare and I doubt Labor will waste it lets us hope not.

Just as well I do not drink coffee Belly. Fear? No, I don't think so. Fact? Yes.
I am not suggesting the Howard government has been perfect. Far from it. No government is.
Compared with what we might have had under Labor and what we will have under a future Labor government though then Howard's mob looks pretty good to me.
Labor would take us back to a prehistoric industrial relations regime that countries all over the world are trying to get rid of. Far from liberating workers and protecting their rights they have found that union dominated workforces make it difficult for workers as well as employers. Reminds me of working at tyre factory one summer - got told to leave a mess in the mould because the siren went to down tools for the break. Asked why not finish the job (and save the company money and the workers the job of clearing out the mess). Got told the union did not allow that - then threatened if I did not obey.
You just have to love those unions. They do so much harm while claiming to be working in the best interests of workers.

Communicat again you are very wrong, yes I am union forever, but not all unions not all actions of some of them.
Here and now I say openly SOME UNIONS DO MORE HARM TO WORKERS THAN GOOD.
And in the name of non existent solidarity some who do not think like radical unions prefer not to openly oppose them.
My view of unionism is based on one central idea, they exist for the members no one else.
The fact you appear not to understand Howard has already lost this election, and that workchoices plays its part in that defeat amazes me.
No reform, workchoices is warfare on all who work for a wage.
True IR reform is long over due Kevin Rudd will bring it.
I again remind readers a difference exists in unions and not every one is the same.
I look forward to increasing membership and constant improvement from the best.
No coffee? no need to worry after I get back from my polling booth I will heat up the PC and say good day here.
Maybe have a not very quite beer.
Tune? well I may hum by by by by Johny good by!

If K.rudd hands out 12 mth free passes to melbournes strip clubs, brothels and other fine institutions of respect for females and their continued emancipation, l might be tempted to put in my first valid ballot ever.

Lead from the (full) front(al).

This article has had a wider circulation than just OLO, having been, as stated, published in Eureka Street. See: http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3256 .

It seems the article is preparing the public for an election result, perhaps a bit like the 1987 one, that despite a significant general swing to the opposition failed in the marginal seats to deliver it government. Ever so gently (and perhaps, just perhaps, wisely), the article seems to be cautioning against the indicative validity of virtually the entire opinion polling industry showing around a 9 - 10 point lead for Labor. See: http://www.crikey.com.au/2007-Election/The-polls.html .

What I haven't seen is how many seats this lead would translate into if it was relatively uniform across Australia. My impression is, much, much more than just the seats required to win government. Why is not more being made of this? Could it be that it might be seen as putting a hex on a hoped-for outcome? The FEEL in the electorate is that the swing is on, but there seems to be a reluctance amongst the recognised commentariat to extrapolate its foreseeable effect. The betting market is accepting it. What does the commentariat know or suspect that the rest of us don't?

Could its caution perhaps be connected in any way to knowledge of claims contained in "Australia-Aggregate Enrolment Levels 1947-1987" that, at the roll close for those 1987 Federal elections, the enrolment level amongst that part of the population eligible for electoral enrolment was 104.39%? It is interesting that a surge in nett enrolment level of around 220,000 enrolments, or 2% of total enrolments, is claimed to have occurred in the week before roll closure for those 1987 elections. (The enrolment level figures come from a table accompanying Submission 123 in this link: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/elect04/subs.htm )

If there is a belief amongst the commentariat that the 1987 experience may be repeated, that would explain this article's caution.

This article's caution is all the more understandable in the light of another electoral phenomenon, what are claimed to be last-minute rushes to get onto the electoral rolls.

Now it may be thought that recent amendments to electoral legislation, changes that are widely understood to have the effect of closing the electoral rolls at 6:00 PM on the day the writs are issued for the Federal elections, will prevent a last-minute enrolment surge such as that of 1987 and subsequent election years from occurring.

I beg to suggest this will not necessarily be so.

A series of four posts titled "The Method in the Proposed Referendum Madness" to the topic "Vote against four year Federal Parliamentary terms", commencing with this link: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=881#15317 , and continuing further down the thread, explain why this seeming early closure of the rolls may be ineffective.

Returning to the matter of the enrolment surge of July 1987, Submission 161 on the list at http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/elect04/subs.htm seems to make a case for the enrolment surge that was claimed to have occurred AFTER the announcement of the 1987 Federal elections actually having been in the enrolment accountancy BEFORE that announcement. If that is true, then it is a BIG WORRY, because that might indicate some degree of manipulation as to the emplacement of names on rolls. Electoral fraud based upon carefully emplaced names is virtually undetectable, should it be occurring.

Submission 161 establishes a discrepancy in the enrolment accountancy for the 1987 roll-close of 204,880 enrolments Australia-wide. Would that have been enough to have made the marginals go counter-trend if it represented fraudulent vote claims on that occasion?

Crikey identifies Bennelong as a critical marginal seat. See: http://www.crikey.com.au/2007-Election/The-Most-Critical-Seat.html . Does the scenario in this link: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=445#8741 to a post to the topic "Bennelong: John Howard vs Maxine McKew" seem a likely prospect?

The feeling is real, the outcome assured, want to bet it is not?
We need to review a few things even when he was unbeatable John Howard was not liked.
If you understand just how out of touch the ALP was for a time you will see we made Howard unbeatable.
Simon Crean , tell if you have an understanding of politics how he could ever lead us?
And do you remember the day Crean put his spite filled support behind his mate Latham?
That day robbed the party of a leader with a real chance then of winning.
In truth if you do understand the subject would Kim Beasley have led us so badly?lost the senate? no way!
Rudd say what you will is not letting Howard wedge the ALP.
He is assured of government, some Medea are trying to hide the fact they already know Howard left it too late to go, and lefts his imprint on his party so no other leader is ready for the job.
We should never forget this win is as much a protest about Howard school yard gang style government as an endorsement of the ALP.
The election must follow Howard's flaunting of his mate loony tunes Bush ASAP.